As part of our ongoing reports on the status of the federal Transportation Bill, we bring you news that Ohio Senator George Voinovich – a Republican who is retiring this year – has called for a higher federal gas tax in order to fund the Transportation Bill. Here’s an excerpt from Sen. Voinovich’s letter, which makes a conservative case for the gas tax:

multiyear transportation bill that is paid for would be a real economic stimulus and create immediate jobs. The Transportation Department estimates that for every $1 billion the federal government invests in highways and bridges, 34,800 jobs are created or maintained. Highway projects worth more than $47 billion are ready to go, according to state departments of transportation. …

We do not need to borrow money for the transportation bill. We can pay for it by increasing the gas tax. … The gas tax is a user fee, and just a few cents could help create jobs, improve our infrastructure and better the climate. …

Reagan knew America was in dire straits and fought hard for a gas tax increase once he realized the effect it would have on the economy. It was a tough pill for his conservative colleagues to swallow. But, in the end, Congress passed the much-needed Surface Transportation Assistance Act of 1982, which provided a 5-cent gas tax increase and created hundreds of thousands of jobs. History speaks for itself.

Today, groups that don’t traditionally back tax increases – among them, the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, the National Association of Manufacturers and the American Trucking Association – have come out in support of a gas tax increase because of this reauthorization bill’s ability to put Americans back to work.

I’d like to think this would be a compelling argument to Congressional Republicans, as I’m sure it is compelling to many actual Republican voters across America. However, I doubt it will move very many of them. Congressional Republicans have a different set of conservative values than those espoused by Ronald Reagan. They see any tax as inherently bad, and do not believe any good can come from government spending, on anything, even on transportation – which is essential to our nation’s economy.

While many Republicans around America – including US Secretary of Transportation Ray LaHood – understand the need to get a new Transportation Bill done as soon as possible, Congressional Republicans are instead fighting to block action on reauthorization. The current Transportation Bill has already expired and was temporarily reauthorized through December. That means action on a full renewal will have to be taken this year, likely in the so-called “lame duck” session of Congress that takes place in November and December after the midterm elections. But Congressional Republicans are trying to stop any action from being taken in that “lame duck” session:

House Republicans are going forward with plans to introduce a resolution on Tuesday to prohibit the House of Representatives from assembling during the two-month period following the November elections.

A GOP leadership aide confirmed to the Huffington Post that the resolution, authored by Rep. Tom Price (R-Ga.) for the purposes of preventing Democrats from passing legislative items during the lame-duck session, would be introduced before the House passes additional Medicaid and teacher funding. The aide argued that comments on Sunday by Carol Browner, the White House’s top energy and environmental adviser, suggesting that energy legislation could be considered during the so-called lame duck period, proved that the resolution was pertinent.

The goal seems to be to derail the energy/climate bill, but it would also have the effect of preventing a reauthorization of the Transportation Bill, unless the current bill is extended yet again before December. It’s not likely that the Republican resolution will succeed; there will almost certainly be a “lame duck” session. And Republicans have in the past used that “lame duck” session to do some rather big things – in 1998, after losing seats in the midterm elections, Republican Speaker Newt Gingrich had the House vote to impeach President Bill Clinton.

But even if there is a “lame duck” session, it seems unlikely that Congressional Republicans would vote for a gas tax increase. With Sen. Voinovich embracing it, that’s technically the 60th vote in the Senate, bypassing the filibuster – assuming all other 59 Senate Democrats supported a gas tax too.

Which is a doubtful prospect too. As I reported from Netroots Nation, the House of Representatives is looking at another solution to fund the Transportation Bill, a fee on each barrel of oil, in order to deal with the fact that even many Democrats are scared of a higher gas tax.

Unfortunately, an unwillingness to embrace a higher gas tax is a bipartisan position on Capitol Hill. This is despite the fact that a phased increase would barely be noticed by most voters and drivers, and would improve our transportation and economy rather than hurt it. Washington State voters approved a 10-cent gas tax increase in 2005, phased in over three years, and most people never saw any negative impact.

Americans feel that cheap gas is a birthright, but in recent years we’ve learned that just isn’t true. Peak oil is either here or very near, as the oil price increases of recent years indicate. Major financial investment firms realize this too, with Deutsche Bank predicting oil will hit $175/bbl by 2017. Even in the midst of the worst recession in 60 years, the price of a gallon of gas is still over $3 across California, a price that was unheard of prior to 2006.

It would therefore make sense for us to get ahead of those further increases by raising the gas tax now, to fund the development of alternative transportation that can provide for our economic and travel needs without being reliant on oil. Or, we could find some other sensible way to fund the Transportation Bill.

But whatever the solution, one needs to be found, and the Transportation Bill – including long-term funding for HSR – needs to pass this year. There’s no time to lose on this.